The negative Trustpilot review that cost over £25,000

A firm of solicitors that sued a former client for defamation after he left a negative online review has been awarded £25,000 damages by the High Court in London — but was then bombarded with one-star ratings from outraged members of the public.

Philip James Waymouth left a negative review for UK law firm Summerfield Browne on Trustpilot, an online review site for customer-facing businesses. Unsatisfied after paying a fixed fee of £200 plus VAT for advice, he posted a review accusing the firm of being “another scam solicitor” and “a waste of money”.

Summerfield Browne took legal action, stating in court papers that the review was untrue and defamatory, and had led to a drop in telephone inquiries from prospective new clients.

At an online High Court hearing, High Court Master David Cooke ruled in favour of Summerfield Browne. “For some reason, which he has never fully articulated, the defendant was dissatisfied with the advice he was given,” he said in his judgment.

Stating it was a “serious matter” to accuse a firm of solicitors of dishonesty, he added: “It is beyond any dispute that the words complained of had a clear tendency to put people off dealing with the claimant firm . . . any such allegation is likely to deter those who are unfamiliar with the firm from using its services.”

Waymouth did not attend the online hearing, or instruct a representative to do so. The judgment also said it appeared Waymouth had made no attempt to engage with the firm’s own dispute resolution process.

“As a family firm, the decision to pursue legal action was not one we took lightly and doing so gave us no pleasure,” said Christian Browne, managing director of Summerfield Browne.

“However, we could not let lie an ill-founded review of our work, which a judge deemed to be illegal, defamatory and likely to damage our business and hard-earned reputation. Like any good law firm, we exist to help our clients protect their rights and reputation. We naturally felt it right to do the same for ourselves and we are glad that this unfortunate issue has now been resolved.”

Waymouth was ordered to pay £25,000 to Summerfield Browne in damages, plus costs — but the decision has not been well received in the court of public opinion.

On Tuesday, Trustpilot — which describes itself as “the world’s most powerful review site” — had to ban new reviews from being posted on the law firm’s review page, after dozens of one-star ratings appeared from members of the public who had read news stories about the judgment.

“Taking legal actions against your customers will do far more to ‘defame’ your company than a single negative review,” read one.

Another posed the question: “Is all publicity good publicity?”

By the time reviews were suspended, Summerfield Browne’s overall rating had dropped to 2.1 stars.

In a statement, Trustpilot said the profile had been “temporarily closed for new reviews” adding that its website was supposed to be “a place for feedback based on genuine buying and service experiences”.

However, this did not prevent similarly worded reviews appearing on other online ratings websites. Commentators on social media also seized on the story. Twitter user Neil Cumins described the successful law suit that preceded the online backlash as “one of the greatest acts of self-sabotage in recent corporate history”.

The importance of customer reviews has come to the fore during the pandemic, with consumers turning to online retailers and service providers in their droves.

Online ratings can be a valuable source of information for customers, but some reviews may be unduly negative or unrealistically positive.

Consumer groups including Which? have become increasingly concerned about problems such as fake reviews that give shoppers false confidence in products or services. Review websites have also cracked down on service providers that offer inducements for a write-up that is rosier than the reality.

“More people are shopping online than ever before during the coronavirus pandemic, so online reviews have taken on an even higher level of importance for consumers,” said Rocio Concha, Which? director of policy and advocacy.

“If lots of people are leaving reviews on services that they haven’t used then this could skew ratings and undermine people’s trust in online reviews.”

The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority launched an investigation into misleading online reviews in May 2020, including the question of whether online review sites were “taking sufficient measures to protect consumers”. It also pledged to examine “how the websites currently detect, investigate and respond to fake and misleading reviews”.

Legal experts say business owners who are worried about negative online reviews should try to show that they have engaged with any unhappy customers and attempted to resolve their problems.

Jason Williams from legal advice firm Lawgistics said businesses should reply to negative reviews with a “carefully worded response” rather than reacting defensively or demanding the comment be removed.